I’m not altogether convinced he didn’t do it, but I am convinced that he didn’t get a fair trial and that he probably couldn’t be convicted under the standard of reasonable doubt. I was wondering about how this played out.
I was hoping that Koenig would say something about the massive scam that is “Global-Tel-Link” calls that are foisted on inmates and their families, but that was understandably not the focus of the podcast.
I’m with you ActionAbe - I honestly can’t say if he did it or not, but after Serial and now listening to what Rabia Chaudry and her associates have uncovered (after nearly twenty years of work) it’s impossible not to conclude that Syed was railroaded by both the police and prosecutors. They repeatedly and consistently either hid or altered evidence that would have been in Syed’s favor, or intentionally misrepresented that evidence to the court and jury.
Syed’s defense counsel was also at fault for not seeing what should have been clear warning signs, and that in fact makes up part of his present appeal - both the failure of the prosecution to turn over exculpatory evidence, as well as ineffective defense counsel at trial.
I strongly suggest listening to “Undisclosed” - it’s a truly amazing analysis of the deep details of the case.
What bothered me most is that the case was handled appropriately according to the detective consultant. That is insane to me, but I can see how it would be the case given our justice system.
A major issue is the way that witnesses and the jury were outcome biased: “If he did it, we can’t risk him being out on the street.” That’s not the standard for conviction, and for very good reasons.
“Criminal Justice” often seems a nicely iron term.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
